Jump to Navigation

Login / Register

St Cago bike polo mallets DZR bike shoes for street and bike polo Velolocuma bicycles Riding in Circles

Restarting Play After Out-of-Bounds Ball

This kind of goes along with the time out thread, but it’s separate. Is conceding half court after a ball happens to bounce out too big of a penalty for something that is typically unintentional and simply happenstance? Can you conceive of a way to write this better? Does it matter? Get creative. Discuss solutions that may be more complex but better balanced. Or tell me it’s fine and no one gives a shit. Whatever!

Current Form
§3.2.3 – Out of bounds
§3.2.3.1 – When the ball leaves the area of play, possession is forfeited by the team which last touched the ball. This includes deflections off of a player’s body or bike.
§3.2.3.2 – The game will restart according to §3.3.

§3.3 – Resuming play
§3.3.1 – Each team returns to their half of the court.
§3.3.2 – The appropriate team receives possession of the ball.
§3.3.3 – The referee establishes both teams are ready by receiving a verbal acknowledgment.
§3.3.4 – The play restarts when either the ball or a player from the team in possession of the ball crosses half-court.

3.2.3.1

i've never liked this rule, why is it this way (deflections off body/bike)?

Blue lines. You get your defensive third of the court if the ball is awarded to you for any call or after a goal.

Defensive third? Or 40 feet? The center line at Alberta (120' long?) would be a blue line on many other courts.

I like the partitioning of the court to award advantage. Half court is too blunt. We need to find an agreeable, objective way to implement this concept.

Defensive third, or halfway between the goal line and half-court. Either one. And this year at NA's if the courts have boards only 4' high, I expect there to be at least a lil controversy when a team gets half court, and possibly an EZ goal due to a simple deflection.

3.2.3.1 is terrible. there has to be a better way. like the player who caused the ball to leave play is penalized. like if pete shot it and matt moved infront and a wheel caused it to leave play, it's matts fault. if pete shoots it, into matts wheel at half court, it's matts fault. the ref would have to pay attention and see who actually caused the out of bounds. it's like in basketball when the fat kid got stuck on the line and would throw it at your feet to knock it out of bounds on you. it's shitty.
i don't know. i just drove for too long with gf's family. i shouldn't be this site right now.

I like 3.2.3.1

It's very simple, it's clear, and has clear precedent from other sports.

I don't think, like in other sports, people are intentionally trying to deflect the ball out off another person, it would take a lot of skill, and not much advantage.

I would like to see faceoffs, not just for this, but for other situations (trapped ball, etc), where there isn't really a clear advantage to either team.

my issue is when someone takes a hard shot from half court into multiple defenders, the ball is blocked and sent out of bounce off of a defenders wheel.
the shooter gets the ball back and does the same thing. etc.

This is intentional: the defenders should be tracking the shot/attacking the player in possession much further up the court... turtling the goal is boring.

i don't know how you play defense, but i try to be somewhere between the goal and the ball.

Yep, but you're still responsible for how the ball reacts with your equipment... you can receive a moving ball regardless of it's speed. Rad ball that sucker to the ground and make your breakaway!

is this really that big an issue? I don't think it happens very often